IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3749 of

2025 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 20560 of 2025 ==========================================================

ILADEVI KIRITSINHJI RAOULJI & ORS.

Versus HEIRS OF LATE KUSUMKUMAR HARSHVARDHANSINHJI CHAUHAN &

ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR DHRUV K DAVE(6928) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4 DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1,1.2,2,3,4.1,4.2,4.3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J. L. ODEDRA Date : 04/12/2025 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE)

1. This application is filed by the applicants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 45 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 03-02-2025 passed by the learned 2^nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Godhra in Special Civil Suit No.17 of 2013.

2. Rule is served upon the respondent and learned advocate Ms.

Shivani J. Barot on behalf of learned Advocate Mr. P. A. Jadeja has appeared for respondents.

3. Learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the contents of para-3 to 4 of the application, wherein it stated that the captioned appeal ought to have been filed within a period of 90 days from the order, however the certified copy of the judgment and decree was applied for and received after some delay due to medical and personal circumstances of applicant No.1, who is a senior citizen aged over 84 years and undergoing treatment. It is submitted that after receipt of the judgment, multiple legal consultations were undertaken due to the voluminous record, the complex questions of fact and law. involved, and the necessity to examine the extensive documentary evidence (over 200 Village Form Nos. 7/12 and related revenue entries). It is submitted that the internal family deliberations were required, since the matter pertains to ancestral and estate claims involving multiple legal heirs, some of whom reside outside Gujarat and had to be consulted for instructions, affidavits, and logistical coordination and that due to the age and health of the lead applicant, Covid-related after-effects, and financial limitations, the drafting and filing process took additional time beyond the limitation period and therefore the same occasion in preferring the accompanying Appeal, which is required to be condoned.

4. Therefore, learned advocate has drawn attention of this Court to the reasons for which delay has occurred.

5. Learned advocate for the respondents formally opposes the grant of application.

6. Considering the aforesaid, particularly, period of 45 days of delay, the Court is of the view that considering the facts involved in the case, delay cannot be treated as inordinate.

7. Considering the submissions and the contents of the para mentioned hereinabove, the delay is also explained sufficiently.

8. A reference in this regard may be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Sheo Raj Singh (Deceased) through Legal Representatives and others vs/. Union of India and Another, reported in (2023) 10 SCC 531, wherein the term “Sufficient Cause” was interpreted and the approach of Courts while deciding application for condonation of delay was discussed.

9. In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. The delay of 45 days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and decree dated 03-02- 2025 passed by the learned 2^nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Godhra in Special Civil Suit No.17 of 2013 is hereby condoned. The Registry is directed to list the main appeal in due course.

(A.Y. KOGJE, J)

(J. L. ODEDRA, J)

PARESH SOMPURA